Faculty_1963-64_012

Oriental Hall The University Faculty Dec. 17, 1963 Draft Minutes 285. The second Faculty Meeting (1963-64) was called to order by Chairman Dr. Namani at 5:05 p.m. with 29 members attending. 286. The Agenda, having been previously distributed, was approved. 287. Minutes of the meeting Oct. 7, 1963, were accepted. 238. a. Announcements: Dr. Namani reported that there was a balance of LE. 3.190 left from the party at the Kursaal and a balance of LE. 1.60 from last year. It was voted that the money be kept by the Chairman for future expenditure. b. Under old business Dr. Miller withdrew his suggestion to enlarge the membership of the Program Committee upon their report that they are most efficient at their present size. c. Faculty are asked to dismiss their classes on time. Dean Shane volunteered to look into getting the clock and bell system repaired. d. Thanks were extended to those involved in the materialization of the Faculty Lounge. Any problems arising should be directed to J3r. Namani, Dean Nesmith, or Mr. Macho1. e. Mrs. Alfadl invited Faculty members and their families to a Christmas Party on Dec. 21 from 4 to 8. f. Mrs. Ljunggren requested that faculty giving exams just after the coming vacation announce to their students that there will be heavy fines imposed on anyone who wlosesiJ a book over vacation. g. Mr. Manucher pointed out that the new date for the receptiion for Dr. and Mrs. Bartlett is Thursday, Jan. 9, rather than Jan. 8, as announced in the faculty bulletin. 289. Report of Committee on :j0nissions and Discrepancies52 in the final version of the Statement on Organization of Faculty: Dr. Naff reported that the committee collated the versions and a definitive version is now possible. The committee recommended that a preamble and procedure for amendment be formulated and added to the document. The Faculty voted unanimously to accept the corrected organizational statement. The accepted statment does not include the introductory comments written by the committee. Dr. Bartlett pointed out that the document has been referred to incorrectly as a constitution, and that it has never been formally approved by the Board of Trustees. Hence, the relationship of the document to the executive function of the university is not clear. He proposed: a. The Faculty continue to work under the document as it stands; b. Pefore the document is closed, an amendment procedure be added. c. The relationship of the document to the executive function of the university be clarified. rv